tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN October 13, 2015 3:00pm-5:01pm EDT
taking away benefits from people that were found to reenter, you have to say to yourself, the people who decide the laws and vote on them, they are not affected by this. they have to understand directly affected, but they are affected anyway as far as we are these people going to get food from? they will go back to do whatever they did to get in jail, whether it was to sell drugs or steel or things like that. you can't say, well we want to help people and we want these people that are injured and come out of jail and do the right thing, when you cripple them. they can't vote so they have no importance. host: we will take your point. guest: i think this whole notion of redemption and the difference between a convict and returning citizen is at the heart of this
discussion. when someone views themselves as a convict, if society views somebody as a convict, that isolates and minimizes their role and ability to participate productively in our community. identifying yourself or somebody else as a returning citizen is intended to remove that label to fully embrace them as a person first who has a criminal whoory, rather than someone is a criminal history, and that is all they could potentially be. acknowledging that these are individuals who we want to come back and that we want to embrace and for them to help improve and rebuild their lives is at the heart of everything that is the focus of our work. it is not a matter of providing what we think sounds nice and what might be meaningful to us. it's a matter of what is going to really help make successful change possible for that person. host: we move on to alex in
rockville, maryland. you're on the air. guest: good morning. i wanted to make a point. i've seen a lot in the news with like lives matter and the issue we were discussing this morning, but i think the effort should be made to address some of these issues further back, so not after people have been imprisoned and released. i think if you give people the opportunity when they are much younger, so they can get to , we can prevent a lot of these things when people have things to do. when you give them opportunity, they tend to get into less trouble. host: your thoughts? guest: one of the areas we focused on within our facility is our youthful offenders. we have a specific program unit designated for them, so we quantify them as anyone 21 and other -- and under.
we give them approaches and specific content to these eight groups to focus in on things before they become a probation have it. when you're talking about different ways that the community and legislation can support them before they even enter on the path of becoming all justice system, that makes the most sense. incarceration is the endgame, we need to focus on the beginning to stop the individuals from coming here. that is not just a matter of the family or the finances or education. it always to be a collaborative partnership, synchronized to understand the problems. what do you think about this, here is a tweet from one of our viewers saying maybe returning them to the community from which they came as part of the problem. perhaps a new environment would be better. guest: i think they can work both ways. it makes a big difference for
folks to go some -- go back to something familiar so they know the different resources that are available to them. however, at that is where the problems began, i absolutely echo and agree that in some circumstances, it does make sense to have a fresh start in other places. it is an individual choice. host: bob from origin, virginia and -- from warrenton, virginia. perhaps there is an alternate way to look at it. having these people first come to terms with the choices they have made and the consequences of their actions. of my answer off the air, thank you -- i will take my answer off the air, thank you. the thing that comes is the individuals responsible for
the choices and decisions they or run itn comments being a social problem, it is, but it is an individual first. i'm a clinical social worker and that is the perspective we have is that the individual itself determining, we want to empower that person and educate them and build skills and develop insight into the nature of their behavior and the impact that it has had. we want you to think about victims and their experiences and their rights, they are just a part of the criminal justice system as the person who would be held accountable for the event. it's a very complex puzzle piece that comes together. programs need to develop that insight and my comments in the beginning, we talked about risk factors, understanding antisocial personality traits and thought patterns, that is an underlying premise that we need to enact change on so that they can make an form and make more productive choices. host: will or that the operating
budget for 2015 the montgomery $70ty jail was little over million. is dedicated for what you do, reentry services? guest: we have a unique scenario in montgomery county that we don't provide therapeutic services on a contract basis. every thing is held as part of our annual budget so there's not a firm number to place on all the programs we combine because we are partnered with different private providers in the community, as well as county providers. figures,hink about the it is a staff team of up -- upwards of 30. individuals you are talking about the number of worked out -- work hours combined and we don't have a lot of -- host: sorry, we lost our connection. we will try to get that back.
she is the director of the department of -- the reentry services manager at every counties department of corrections. our conversation with the folks at that facility in maryland were going inside the correction system this morning to give you an idea of what happens inside these jails, the inmates in there, what they are in therefore and all the challenges -- what they are in there floor and all the challenges. also, preparing inmates for life after jail and kendra is vital to that, the manager of reentry services that range from workforce drug rams to mental health, as well as substance abuse. we got cut off there, but if you want to finish your thought for us.
we were talking about the budget for reentry services and how it's in line with a lot of program offerings. it really is a system approach we have within the department. amt: for your resources, i curious about the heroin epidemic that many communities are seeing in the united states. here is one line -- headline from the washington times that says -- what does that mean for you and what you are trying to do in montgomery county? guest: substance abuse as a need is a very challenging to address, both for individuals involved in the system and otherwise. my colleague will be coming on shortly to talk about this in more detail. when we are talking about the growing epidemic -- it is
impacting individuals, youth through adults. we have a new program that is something she will expand more on, but it's a grant funded program modeled after several other programs in the state. we want to provide education as well as medication support for individuals as they are executing their relief and turning back to the communities to help with cravings and other physical components to supplement and support so the other programmatic works. host: we would go to frank from virginia. caller: thank you. i did four years in a virginia state penitentiary. 31 years ago i was convicted and in, i saw was people coming including myself, getting muchcerated, i had so
unnecessary stuff in my life, i was distracted big-time from what was good and law-abiding and what i wanted to do with my life. i got in and all the distractions were taken away, but economic decisions for myself until i began programming. the best thing that helped me when i got out was to not have unnecessary things in my life, to keep my life simple. i would suggest the people that run the prison systems to get rid of entertainment for the convex, get rid of cake and ice cream and all the unnecessary stuff that they have their. keep it simple so that they can focus on these programs and focus on themselves, their victims. the best thing i did when i got out was to keep my life simple
i've been up for 31 years. i have a beautiful wife, i'm successful with four kids. i don't have cable, i don't have dish, i listened the c-span -- listen to c-span. we don't have electronic toys, we go hiking and camping in the guise that i have seen that have not gotten back or gone back to prison, they have done very similar things. i would encourage the prison system to keep it clean and get rid of all the necessary stuff that these inmates have to deal with in their minds and lives. think?endra, what do you individual has their own pathway into the composes the system and their own pathway out. i'm very happy to hear that the caller found what worked with him and i think that rings true for other individuals. it's going to be a matter of what works for that person, what
their priorities are. i do agree with what he was commenting on in terms of finding out what is going to fill his time and his focus when he's out in the community. money of the factors we look at is leisure and recreation. if we are guiding these folks to take out problematic things for their life, what will they fill their time with? one of the going to be doing? this is about developing prosocial leisure and recreation activities, hiking like he was describing and it's important as well. supporting positive behavior change goes along with that. he was commenting on taking away different essentially feel-good things within a facility. positive behavior change is built on the premise of positive reinforcement. recognizing that progress is being made, achieving small things for small rewards and staying focused on the endgame of success after release. host: let's go to warren in florida.
i just have one comment, and i know it's not credited the end all, but this is one comment that i think people should think about. ishink the right to vote essential to reentering society, because people have to have a stake in their own lives. if they feel like they have a stake in their lives when they get out, that they can participate in society, i think it would help. host: do you have any thoughts on that? guest: i think it rings true. for someone to participate in our society, they need to be a full member. that is my personal opinion, but i think when someone is releasing from the criminal justice system, they are faced with lots of different labels and things that they can do. as a matter of empowering someone to reach their full potential, i think that needs to be fully recognized. having the ability to vote,
being able to apply for a job without having additional stigma , which could potentially limit them from opportunities for housing as well. is are all things that come in to play as we embrace a convict versus a returning citizen. host: talk about the role the private sector plays. employers in your community out there. guest: director green had mentioned the small business unity that i come to visit us a few weeks ago. employers, whether they are part of an organization or not, play a huge role. initiative will talk about ways there can be a fair interview where not one of the initial questions will be around the individual's history, criminal or not. we are looking at the skills someone is coming to apply for a position and having that neutral stance as an employer plays a key role. one of the underlying elements
from our american job center curriculum is the return on investment. it's a matter of grooming and training customers here at the center so that they are able to solid skills and a work ethic and knowledge of what employers want so that match can be sustained for employment on the long-term. when we talked about the private making sure that opportunities are available to different sorts of individuals who need the same -- meet the same qualifications. otherwise, i think it's paramount. host: give us more details about the curriculum for trying to get a job when you are on the outside. guest: the american job center -- it is afocuses course of 16 weeks and it focuses on job writing and skill development including resumes where the offender would describe the criminal history to an employer so that they can touch base on all the different
important factors and what is not important about them, so that when they do the interview, they are practicing their skills for those sessions. of thosemodation skills which can come more easily than the larger aspect of personal development. we have two superb coaches who staff our american job center and one of their primary talking points is that life readiness is also -- often more challenging than job readiness and so the accommodation of both skills in combination and commendation -- accommodation with -- in combination with my skills. host: charlie in illinois, hi there. caller: i just have a question. of the families of the incarcerated, as they are getting ready to get out, are they given education to help them?
to they have a way to contact someone if they see someone failing? can we get help because he is going down the wrong path, he or she? host: can drop -- kendra? guest: family plays a huge part of the reentry process. we have a couple of different ways we want to incorporate family in that reentry experience. when someone is incarcerated, the family can feel incarcerated with them on the outside. it impacts everyone in the family, this can include children. when they talk about how to engage the family as part of our assessment process, both within the detention center and correctional facility as well as in our prerelease program, we want to solicit their input, whether it's to the form of sponsorship and have an ongoing role with the offender, or as the initial calls from reentry staff to ask about what was going on, what are some itsestions you have, with
individual and had that conversation about what the reentry process looks like and what their goals are going home. we have another partnership with the conflict resolution center of montgomery county and through reentry mediation, individuals can inject some concerns and help prepare their plan with their family members on how things will be like when they return home. that does not substitute for family counseling or other therapeutic or could -- clinical intervention, but it starts the conversation and that -- that is often the most difficult piece. in terms of communicating, we open our e-mail and phone to individuals to reach us and pass along information. we are aware confidentiality standards and have a -- and hippa. the reentry services -- we appreciate you talking to our
viewers and giving us information about what you do. thank you very much. we will dig down a little bit deeper, coming up into mental health and substance abuse services available at the jail. labor joining us, now is secretary tom perez talk about what the labor department is trying to do on this front. mr. secretary, you recently visited montgomery county correctional facility. you saw what they are doing theirere. they recently announced $10 billion in grants to ready the inmates for the job market before they are released. what do you make of what they are doing and montgomery county and why do you feel the labor department and the obama administration -- is important to put money toward this? guest: addict the best way to reduce recidivism is to give people the skills to compete the
day they get out of jail and to make sure that they are connected to the workforce. i had the privilege of serving the montgomery county council from 2002 to 2006. i saw the program firsthand, it worked back then and has worked -- and will work now. it has a huge return on investment. the reality is about -- is that while 6000 people leave these facilities each year, something like 9 million people are leaving county jails and city jails. they focus is to make sure that in these communities, people are ready to learn. warden greens one of my favorite people -- warden green is one of my favorite people. a national leader in this area, so we saw what worked in montgomery county and we want it -- we want to take it nationally. roughly 20 communities received
grants and they are going gangbusters. we have a tremendous amount of applications for this because people understand that a smart initiative has to involve making sure that people are ready to succeed when they leave county jails, state prisons, federal prisons. host: how will you know if it's a success? how will you track that? guest: it's pretty simple. you track the number of people who are placed, what they are making, you track whether there -- they are employed six to 12 months later. you track credentials they obtain while in jail. i've ever talking to the warden when i was out there a year ago -- i remember talking to the warden when i was out there a year ago. the program where people can get ged's while in jail continues to be very solid.
when people have more skills than credentials, then they are more marketable -- more skills and credentials, then they are more marketable. another way to track is to see how many employers you can engage. if people are getting in -- trained but nobody is hiring them, then that's not good either. i talked to employers all the time, they believe in second chances. in many cases, they have a skill shorter -- shortage. they want welders, other people talent and they believe in second chances. we have had great success. the largest private employer in the state of maryland is john topic -- john hopkins university. had the head of the hospital with us right now, he will tell you that this is an act of enlightened self interest. he would also tell you that they have a former offenders employee at entry-level positions. may have them employed as economists, x-ray techs, up and
down the various job descriptions at john hopkins. this is a smart on-time initiative by reducing recidivism. host: what would employers tell you about the challenges with hiring a former inmate? guest: a number of employers have concern like this person got convicted for theft, what do i do? is, we have tools in the toolbox to address some of those concerns that you have. system in thee job centers, they have security bonds. if an employer says they might be willing to take a flyer on that person what happens at the answer is, we will insure against that. a number of people who are leaving jail have requirements to report to information officer -- a probation officer.
those -- logistical items that have to be and can be worked out. host: the attorney general announced that 6000 prisoners will be released from jail to deal with overcrowding there. the you have any concerns about that? guest: i think it's being done in a very methodical way. we haven't over incarceration issue in this country. challenge in the our communities across the country, anyway that was akin to dealing with cancer by building more hospitals in set of dealing with cancer by addressing the underlying issues surrounding it. i think it has to be done in a thoughtful way and can be done, but there are way too many people who are incarcerated who i think could do well in communities and that's why i think what is heartening to me about what we are seeing is that
there is a bipartisan understanding that we need to be smart on crime. toolboxnly tool in your is a hammer, pretty soon everything looks i can nail. -- looks like a nail. host: we appreciate your time, thank you. we will continue with our conversation with staff from montgomery county correctional facility. we are live from there this morning in maryland, about 30 miles from washington, d.c. inside one of a housing units is of the tomorrow who is montgomery county's department of health adult forensic services. thank you for your time, what is adult forensic services? guest: adult friendly services is a section of the department of health and human services under behavior health and cry
six at -- pricing -- crisis services. haverk with convicts that substance abuse and mental health issues. host: what is the percentage of population and montgomery county correctional facility that falls into that group of mental health and substance abuse? guest: the population that we 19% ofling with is about all inmates who get booked into the facility suffer from a disorder and what that means is they suffer from both mental health issues and substance abuse issues. if we were to only look at inmates who suffer from substance abuse issues, that percentage is a lot higher, almost 80%. host: do you find that this trend is increasing? what have you seen over the years? ,uest: we have seen an increase
not only in the percentage of folks who are coming in with those issues, but a tremendous increase in the severity of the symptoms. as far aswe fluctuate a number -- the number of arrests in this county, we have seen that the number of folks with mental illnesses has been going up. percentagewise, that number has stayed steady, even as the number of arrests have gone down. we are dealing with very extreme situations right now. host: what are the challenges for you? aret: or challenges tremendous, because we have individuals who come into our jail for minor offenses and that's predominantly things like trespassing or disorderly conduct and a talking about the population that comes in with severe mental health issues. many of those folks to have minor offenses. they tend to stay longer in our facility because they may not be
able to access the resources that we have for them being as ill as they are. also in of staying longer because our judicial system tends to postpone handling those cases, trying to find a solution for when they are ready to come back out into the community. typically, that population ends up staying longer in the jail than somebody without mental health issues would stay in the facility for this -- for the same charge. host: what challenges present itself because of that? how you treat the mental illness beyond therapy? today have access to drugs, etc.? guest: we have a full array, we work very collaboratively with the department of corrections and between us, health and human services and the department of corrections, we have multiple
types of services here in the facility. we have a full mental health unit that we can house those offenders who cannot unction in the general population because of the acuity of the assist -- symptoms. we have a full-time psychiatrist, have a full mental health staff, a number of specialized approaches like groups that we provide and support that we can divide to those inmates. thatrate reentry planning also starts from the day they get arrested. we start looking at their needs for mental health and substance abuse issues from the day they get arrested and we began planning. the difficulty sometimes of planning in this population is that because we are a detention facility, folks come here sometimes a new trial, and it's very unpredictable as to when they will leave, some of them can post bond productively, some in of getting sentenced and stay -- er,
asn he did the product of long as we can while they are here and try to stabilize and engage them in treatment, even if we find that they may not have been engaged in treatment in the community. when try to motivate them options of our treatment, sick yet commanded -- host: we are in the housing facility at the montgomery county correctional facility morrow with athena the mc emery county department of health, talking about the challenges of mental health and substance abuse. we want to get your thoughts on this, your questions and comments. .epublicans, (202) 737-0002 democrats, (202) 737-0001. independents, (202) 628-0205. also, those of you with experience and the corrections
system and this mental health and substance abuse issue, dial in at -- we go to brenda in cleveland the democrats. caller: i just one of the comment -- wanted to comment that i have a son who has mental issues and chemical addiction issues for the most of his life. he has been out of -- in and out of mental hospitals and jail. this is going on several years. what i have found is a think when president reagan close all the mental hospitals and put everybody on an outpatient basis, we don't -- they are all too willing to put people in jail, but not too willing to get the mini mental health -- mental health long-term. i don't think we have any long-term mental facilities left. i find out a lot of people think that people's mental health problems the drugs. that's not necessarily true.
my son is a borderline personality disorder and that requires therapy, talk therapy. i wanted to comment on that. once these people come out, are they still going to have long-term services? host: athena? guest: that's an excellent comments, thank you for that. comes inhat everyone with very different needs and one of the things that i would -- is whether the specific needs of individuals who comes in -- we have tried to assess not only the history of substance abuse issues, but as well as the mental health issues and the approach is different depending on what the needs are. we are fortunate in this community to have an array of resources that we can refer to individuals. abuse, we have access to 28 day programs, as
well as longer-term facilities that we can send folks, if they need that level of service. we have an array of outpatient programs as well. depending on the need and visit -- and intensity of treatment, we are able to refer and provide advantages as a person gets ready to exit the jail. the other thing that we do, we are very unique in this, that we have an in-house substance abuse program where inmates can live in a separate unit and receive substance abuse services for as long as they are in this facility. vicki in saint augustine, go ahead. i have a two-pronged question. have visited a correctional facility in florida for the past eight years on a volunteer basis.
survey was that about 10 years ago and found that 90% of the population at this but to ill or prison suffered from severe mental illness and that is a problem. they locked them in dorms for months or years at a time because they can't manage their behavior. is quite disturbing to me. issue i wanted to ask, and the south, particularly, prisons are rough and harsh and they are very little -- there is further compassion on the part of the legislator or the voters to change anything. what impact, or how can we impact that so that the general population of voters understands that these people need compassion and rehabilitation? thanks for your answer. callerguest: thank you so much r your comment. we find that our population, who
need special managing, is not as high as you mentioned. it would he along the same level as the rest of the country. we have about a 19% need to separate individuals with severe mental health issues, and handle them in a special unit. that unit has a lot of special services. licensed mental health workers, psychiatry and psychiatric services that are intensive, and folks can stay in that unit as long as they are unable to handle placement and general populations. we are very fortunate in that sense. during that stay, of course, all the reentry services begin linking them to community services that they need when they will exit. as far as what we could do about compassion, that is one of my favorite topics. i think there is a tremendous tendency to consider inmates as separate from us. in my experience, these are the
folks that walk amongst us. anyone of us could have committed an act that might, for one reason or another, have landed us in an institution. this is not a separate population, these are folks just like anyone else dealing with an illness. despite what might have brought them into the institution is a compassionate approach, and a chance to rehabilitate. we try to offer that. in this facility, our officers are part of our treatment team. they have a lot of training in dealing with mental health. we approach individuals with a rehabilitative motive in mind. every time we approach them, we try to offer them options as to how to make different decisions and engage in treatment. host: we will hear from chris, pennsylvania, good morning to
you, what is your experience with the corrections system in the united states? caller: i worked in the department of corrections for 16 years. i'm retired. i see a lot of the problems coming through as more geared to treatment. when they release people, the crime goes up. every day, in the news, you hear about it. it keeps going on. fixing it with treatment is not working. they go to jail in pennsylvania, take a test, fail on purpose, so they get mental health treatment. they don't have no real set program for it. what happens is they get in these areas -- mental health and pennsylvania -- they assault
staff, they felt other inmates, and they get away with it, they dropped the charges. a lot of the mental health people in pennsylvania, they are drug addicts. they come to prison. on the street, they functioned ok until they got caught. host: a lot there. what are your thoughts? guest: a lot of times, we see inmates who come in, they stabilize. they are very motivated to do well when the exit. a lot of times they accept referrals that we make. sometimes they don't. we cannot force treatment on somebody who exits. everybody has a choice. a court cannot order treatment, unless they commit someone. it is very important to try to motivate as much as we can and
engage them in treatment inside the walls, if we can, before the exit. a lot of times, as motivated folks as they may be, when the exit, they may fall through the cracks, or stop treatment. to thethem return facility, a lot of times. it is a very frustrating cycle that we experience. host: let's talk more about gel addiction services. what we visited the montgomery county correctional facility, we sat down with a former inmate. he talked about one of the programs available. we want to show our viewers, and have you talk about it on the other side. [video clip] jail was called the program -- we learn to deal with ourselves,
and then afterwards, helped someone deal with this situation, when they first came in. i was appear leader -- a peer leader. as inmates, we take care of each other, we give each other a hand. we do everything we can to make people feel comfortable. we would make sure that they have the support they need from each other. host: athena morrow, talk about why this peer-to-peer help is is important, and does it work? guest: we believe it does. we call it jas. it is a modified therapeutic community. based on that, we try to engage the resources that we have amongst everyone who comes into that unit. that involves inmates. our inmates have a lot of resources. they have a lot of experience in how to handle addiction. this is an opportunity for them to be in a sober environment, and participate in structured i
-- structured activities. they can support each other better than anyone else. of course, we have a full array of therapists who provide guidance and set out tasks, but we try to use every resource we have. just like carlos said, we find it invaluable for them to give each other feedback, encouragement, and ideas about how to go about solving problems. we also have, in our team approach, the officers. the officer who oversees the unit is a final person in our -- is a vital person in our team. they are the eyes of years of the treatment team when the providers are not present. we utilize every resource we have and find that to be a supportive environment. many inmates find that to be one of the first times they have experienced that support, especially in a jail setting.
host: hollywood, florida, june, what is your story? caller: i have a son in jail. he was given a 300 day sentence for a misdemeanor battery case. he got into a shoving match with a local bully in florida. prisons we are familiar with here in florida look not at all like the jails they have up there in maryland. what we are learning is if you want to get services from your jail, you need to get arrested in maryland. here, the problem we have with so many people being in jail is because the district attorneys, and so forth, the people who did prosecuting pile charges on top of charges. people with minor offenses and -- wind up going to jail for a
long period of time so the sentences they get do not at all match the crimes that they commit. the other thing is that a lot of the problems we have with drugs in this country are committed by our politicians. we, the people of this country, are responsible for this problem that we have with drugs in this country because we have allowed our politicians to allow drugs into this country that have destroyed families and our communities. that is why we are responsible for cleaning up the mess, and not just punishing people who have problems with drugs. host: your thoughts? guest: i think everybody experiences that in every jurisdiction where charges make compounded,ay get and one thing may lead to
another. we find that once the inmates get to a point where they could get treatment, and start a sober lifestyle, they have to deal with a lot of follow-up with charges. it takes them a while to clean up those charges, get out of probation. it is a long period of getting back. the caller is right. there are a lot of complications when somebody starts getting involved with the drug epidemic that we are dealing with. host: are the services that you offered there typical for what jails offer across the united states, or is this a new program, a new initiative? guest: our jail addiction services program actually started as a federal grant back in 1999. it is a very old program. at that time, i think we were among the first that were piloting this type of program. since then, i know there has been an increase of facilities
across the country who are adopting this way of dealing with the substance abuse issue. i still think we are not among the majority. host: how did the grants work? guest: how do grants work, as far as -- host: how you get the money, how you're supposed to use it? guest: we provide a proposal, depending what the opportunities are for different grants. in this particular instance, with the jail addiction services program, it is a very old program. we had a proposal for, at that time, treat people with minor offenses. we were able to get a federal grant. since then, our local community, our local county council, has accepted funding this program. we were able to sustain it,
based on the results of the evaluation. we found that it was effective in reducing some recidivism and increasing participation in treatment. host: how effective? guest: we have found -- now you are asking me to go back a long time. at that time, if i recall correctly, we found it was an increase of about 10%. actually, a reduction in 10% of recidivism from what was the norm at the time. i can't quote numbers, because it was such a long time ago, but i can say it was a significant reduction. host: from florida, you're next. caller: my question is do you give any kind of skilled training to the mental health
people? my experience has been, when people have some kind of skill, that helps their mental health, and their ability to be employable when they get out, which also helps their mental health. if they are just getting psychological training -- help, and no skills, that contributes to their mental problems when they get out, because they cannot do anything. guest: yes. we do, to some degree, work on skill building here. most of our approach year is -- approach here is trying to stabilize folks. if we can engage them, at least in what is appropriate for them, some of them are appropriate for taking medications, some are appropriate for participating in groups. we try to engage them, as a stepping stone, to services in the community.
we know that managing a mental illness is not something that can be addressed in a short period of time. it is a lifetime issue. we try to do the engaging, motivating, and provide opportunities for continuing that in the community. host: kansas, david, democrat. caller: i would like you guys to listen to kansas's opportunity they have for people who come in. they -- each criminal, they see if they have any mental problems. if they do, they send them to a facility that goes deeper into a program. they put them on a work release
program, and they check into the same facility for mental health. after they go through a couple of years, if they see they can function in society, they let them go ahead. they have halfway houses to put them in. they also have it for people who are in jail, they send them to minimum-security. you cannot have a serious crime, like a violent crime. they will take those individuals, and put them into -- it is the kansas department of rehabilitation corrections. what it is, you have already gone through through evaluation from the court, and the court sees, yes, you are smart, but you do not have a trade. you can go to this location,
they offer college classes for every kind of industry we have -- electronics, heating, plumbing, automotive, a big lineup. you go through this process each day. with most of the classes, you have to take a test each morning. they give you assignments to do at night, when you go from school back to your room. you have to do the assignment. when they come in the next morning, they make you take a test. if you don't pass the test, you don't get out of the room. other people who put the time and to study, they go out and do the train that they are actually -- trade that they are actually trained. host: i will have athena morrow
jump in. what do you make of what he is talking about? guest: if i understand correctly, i think the caller is talking about services for people who may not have a substance abuse issue. that is something that my colleague spoke about earlier. this whole institution is focused on rehabilitation. we have an array of options for folks. inmates are encouraged to participate in this program. they get incentives. they have access to vocational programs here, access to getting their ged, access to college classes. they have a number of opportunities for learning skills that will be useful when they get out. i think that is what the caller was alluding to. host: jim, texas, republican. caller: good morning. [indiscernible] what would jails and prisons
look like if they would lock up people who are obese? it is a burden on our societal cost. host: i apologize to jim, it was very difficult to understand that phone call -- breaking up a bit. we will move on to the next caller. good morning. caller: i would like to speak on the problem before it begins. it usually begins with the youth learning to drink, smoke, and then they graduate into the drug scene. they graduate into the drug say because they are taught the jury -- they are taught the drinking. alcohol is fine, it is ok. you go to the churches, even the catholic church, they teach -- they say drinking is ok, a little bit of wine don't hurt you. these things are destructive.
only religion that is teaching that this thing is wrong is islam. islam teaches you from the beginning that if you get involved in this type of lifestyle, you will find yourself getting further and further in violence. these things are destructive. they will destroy not only the individual, the family, the neighborhoods, the world. host: athena morrow, how do you deal with people's history with alcoholism, the relationship to it, or other substances, and that addiction to it? guest: i'm not sure i understand your question. how do we deal with folks coming in -- host: with their past, and as the caller was alluding to, the
culture that people grow up in. maybe how they view alcohol, or other substances. can you, in the amount of time that they are there, drill down? guest: when we do our initial assessment, we tried to be very culturally sensitive. we try to understand the history of addiction. everybody has their own way of coming into addiction. sometimes, like the caller said, it can be a cultural influence, or not. it can be an influence from the family of origin. someone's friends could have started earlier or late. it depends. that is part of our initial assessment. as we identify the factors, we try to address them. if they are culturally relevant factors that we need to address, we are sensitive to that. i can't tell you that we specialize, and have a different
intervention, but we try to be sensitive. if someone has a religious affiliation that we can help them reconnect with, we try to help them do that. host: what is the assessment process like when someone first comes into the jail? guest: as soon as someone gets booked into the jail, they get to answer a pretty elaborate questionnaire about their involvement in substance abuse and mental health. any of the responses there are positive, that result to a yes, someone has had a history of hospitalizations, or is taking medications, generally, they are referred to our staff, who evaluates further within 24-48 days, that individual for their needs. we try to do a couple of things at that time. we try to identify substance
abuse and mental health needs, to see if someone would qualify for diversion. we work closely with our pretrial unit, which assesses if that person would be a threat to the community. obviously, we try to take the factors into consideration. if the person stays in the jail and die version -- die version -- diversion is not one of our options, we try to that match whatever we found out, whatever the needs of the person are with the needs in our -- with the services in our institution. host: what is divergence? -- diversion? guest: diversion is an opportunity that an offender has, different junctures to have access to create services -- to community services, instead of waiting while incarcerated to get access at the time of release. for example, if someone comes in
with, let's say, a minor offense, and they are appearing before a judge to set their bond within the first 24 hours, if we can match them with a treatment agency in the community, we recommend that to the judge. the judge may be able to lower their bond, release them to the community with the condition that they participate in the program. that would be a post booking divergence -- diversion. host: henry, tell us your story. caller: good morning. i have 18 years working in the federal and state system. my question is, from my observation, inmates who came in court ordered to complete a treatment program were more motivated. is there a way we can get more
inmates to be court ordered to complete the programs? host: athena morrow? guest: we have found that is a very effective way to motivate folks, especially those who battle addiction. that is a population that responds very well to court orders to participate in treatments. it is not full proof, of course, but it does help in providing some leverage that seems to be effective in motivating substance abusers. it is not necessarily an effective way to deal with mental health issues. sometimes severe mental health issues do not respond well to those pressures from the courts. host: we are spending our morning at montgomery county jail, about 30 miles from washington, d.c. you can see them out there on
-- you can see the map there on your screen. there is a population of about 643 inmates at this facility. 570 males, 73 females. they keep them separate. the average age, 18-30 years old. there is approximately 60% of the population there, minorities. the majority of charges, controlled substance abuse and distribution. we are talking with athena morrow about how the jailed about how the jail deals with mental illness -- about how the jail deals with mental illness. we will go to tony, good morning to you. caller: good morning. how are you? host: doing well. your question or comment? caller: i have retired from the georgia department of corrections. i was a counselor there for many years. the problem i have found is most of the inmates, they all come from a single family home, they
all have no education, and they have no work experience. they don't want no work experience. they have all flunked out of school. we tried to get them into ged's, but they want to gang bang, and all of that kind of stuff. they don't want to participate, they want to be on the streets'. they want to run the streets. i think- host: tomorrow, do you have willing participants? guest: that is not my experience. we find that people do want to do well if they have the right opportunities, but it's not easy for them. they have a lot of barriers to overcome. guest: some of the barriers are social support, the lack
of education, lack of leisurely activities that involve staying away from people where drugs are involved. it sometimes involves a change in lifestyle. as we know, those are not easy changes to make. you can provide opportunities, but it takes a while, and becomes a lifelong management issue. they need support in the community to change their life. host: you say they are motivated in jail to change. ton they get out, do you try stay in contact with them? what are you seeing? which depending on programs they get involved with, we have different programs. sometimes we refer folks to residential programs or outpatients. there are facilities involved with monitoring their compliance. facilitiesnce abuse have analysis that is part of their protocol. they also, of course, involve
them in various forms of treatment. the treatment providers are the ones that follow up with the inmates that we refer to them. host: we will go to jeff in caller: st. petersburg. good morning. what are your thoughts? caller:i am from st. petersburg, florida. i'm wondering what percentage of areland's prisons privatized, and what they think about the difference between her job being done in a privatized system, versus being in a state run system? host: go ahead, athena morrow. the firstannot answer part of the callers question. i'm not sure. we have athat long-standing partnership among our departments here locally. our services are funded by montgomery county government.
we have this deep collaborative relationship, and have been able to build on those over the years. i cannot speak to the state system. host: what is your day like on a daily basis? why did you get involved in this work? guest: i have been involved in yearsork for about 26 with montgomery county. it is a population that i am aboutvery passionate helping. i believe when folks come in contact with the criminal justice system, it is an opportunity, as they are in crisis, to provide them with hope. at ag able to offer hope time, when someone comes in, feeling the impact of various environmental impacts that they is theen involved with
right time. when there is crisis and opportunity, at the same time, the potential for change is higher. i find it to be a very dynamic area to work with. i find that folks are very interested in change. to beimportant compassionate, and offer options to this population. it is something that has always interested me. host: athena morrow with the montgomery county division of health. if you want more information about what you learned today, visit them online. that is the website on your screen to learn more. we want to thank athena morrow, and all the folks at montgomery county correctional facility, very much for your time this morning, and allowing us to come inside the correctional facility them, and hear from all of on what they do on a daily basis
and how they prepare inmates for life after jail. thanks to everybody there. that does it for today's "washington journal." we want to thank everyone for calling in as well for your questions and comments. we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern time. enjoy the rest of your tuesday. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> coming up live shortly here on c-span, we will head to the heritage foundation in washington, d.c. for a discussion on former british prime minister margaret thatcher on what would have been her 90th birthday. it is expected to start shortly. online, itgazine," is written, 40 years before an
>> do we need to check anything, tom? are all mics fine, as far as we know? we are not all on mute and have to start over? good afternoon. thank you for joining us here at the heritage foundation in our douglas and sarah allison auditorium. we of course, welcome those of you who join us at our heritage website and those who will be
joining us at c-span3 questions can be sent simply by firstname.lastname@example.org. we are pleased today's program is cohosted by the anglosphere society. it, itse unfamiliar with was formed in 2012. it is an independent, nonprofit, tax-exempt organization and focuses on promoting the special relationship between the united states and the united kingdom, free market economies, and cultural events for english-speaking peoples. in pursuing its mission, the eventshere society holds , encourages the anglosphere alliance, access a forum to evidencend publicize
grounded in the values of freedom and democracy, and fosters networks and personal bonds for discussions on key issues. we are pleased to welcome the founder of the anglosphere society. she previously served as the new york director of the center of security policy for eight years, focusing there on policing terrorism and the homegrown threat posed by radical islam. this allowed her to work collaboratively with policy organizations and law enforcement on both sides of the pond. over 20 years experience in corporate, philanthropic, and consumer public experience on both sides of the atlantic. she also serves as a board member on the intrepid fallen .eroes fund please join me in welcoming amanda bowman. amanda?
amanda: thank you so much, john, and my deepest gratitude to the heritage organization for cohosting this event and your generosity in making it all possible. today we are celebrating the life of margaret thatcher, who would have been 90 years old today. of 2013, the senate passed a resolution to recognize of life, legacy, and example baronessrime minister margaret thatcher, and i would like to quote from that resolution, because i think it sets the stage for this discussion tonight. senate honorsthe the legacy of baroness margaret thatcher for lifelong commitment to advancing freedom, liberty, and democracy throughout the world. recognizes that margaret working with president
ronald reagan, helped to bring a .eaceful end to the cold war reiterates its continued support for the close tie and the special relationship between the united states and the united admiration expresses for baroness margaret thatcher and her legacy as the inspirational and transformative leader in the united kingdom and the world. needless to say, i could not say it better. niall gardner moderating our conversation today, and he brings a unique respective on the life of margaret thatcher. as you know, he is the director for the margaret thatcher center for freedom at heritage and has worked in the washington policy world over a decade and is a leading expert on the u.s.-u.k.
special relationship. an aid toved as margaret thatcher and advised her on a number of international policy issues. working in her private office, niall assisted lady thatcher with her final book -- "statecraft: strategies for a changing world." he has a bachelors and masters in history from oxford university. oxford university is an important part of our conversation, because we have the principle of somerville college oxford, of which margaret thatcher is a distinguished alumni. she started her career as a museum curator and subsequently as an archivist in the public record office. she then became the director of special collections at the
british library. she took up the position of university librarian at yell university and she -- at yale university and she remains there until she was elected the president at somerville in 2009 and took up the position in september 2012. on the expertise academic influences on margaret thatcher for life. haveso are honored to attorney general edward nice, now ronald reagan's distinguished emeritus at the center for legal and judicial studies at heritage. he is a prominent elder statesman and we are delighted to have him speak to the special , and particularly
her special relationship with ronald reagan. us johnlso have with o'sullivan, special advisor and speechwriter to prime minister -- he is and also author and journalist and a senior fellow at the national review institute, and also editor at large of "the national served ashere he editor-in-chief for him is to decade. 1987the scene 97 -- from until 1988, he served as special advisor to margaret thatcher. street, heft downing served informally as a regular speechwriter for the prime minister. he was the principal author of the 1987 conservative election manifesto.
he assisted lady thatcher in writing her two volumes of memoranda. we are fortunate to have a look at lady thatcher for life, steadily and whole, as ts eliot would say. i'm delighted to have this opportunity. thank you. [applause] thank you very much, amanda, for the very kind introduction very warm welcome to our three distinguished guests with us today and a warm welcome to everyone joining us at the heritage foundation. i would like to start off, if i aboutth a first question somerville. margaret thatcher was a student there. she's started on her 18th birthday and oxford was an small
-- instrumental in shaping lady thatcher pro later career. i would like to embark on an opening question with regard to the margaret thatcher scholarship and trust. with regard to the thatcher scholarship, could you give us insight into what somerville oxford are trying to achieve with regard to these scholarships? some details have about the launch of these scholarships trust and what you're trying to achieve with this tremendous project? nile.nk you, the idea of fundamentally is to create a permanent living legacy to margaret thatcher by creating a policy that will bring people to study at oxford from all over the world, who probably would not otherwise. we're following the narrative of margaret thatcher, a woman from
very modest circumstances, but tremendous promise and great academic attainment. who made her way to oxford, which i happen to be principle -- which is the same thing as president. somerville identified margaret thatcher as somebody that was struggling financial and would not be able to get the best of her oxford education without financial assistance. with funds rewarded and also an academic scholarship. thewas taught by some of most excellent teachers in the world. we may speak more about this -- one of her main professors onethy hodgkins was the british woman ever to have won a nobel prize in science.
they taught students at the highest possible level, and we want to continue that tradition in the name of margaret thatcher and bring people from all over .he world to honor her legacy people who are going to succeed in life with the same sort of determination that she displayed. and with regard to the thatcher scholarships, naturally they draw comparison with the roads scholarships, arguably the most famous scholarships in the world at this time, the scholarships established by the great rhodes. cecil how do you see the thatcher scholarships differing from the scholarships, or are there similarities? dr. prochaska: there are similarities and that we want to international students.
we are looking for excellence. we are looking for academic rcellence. at but what the scholarship to do that our scholarships will not pay so much emphasis on is to look for well-rounded people who have ,xcelled with athletic prowess look atre actually women with strong academic ability and we then give them the opportunity to develop the ofracter and profile margaret thatcher. she herself would not have been a rhodes scholar. there are differences. these scholarships are for
undergraduates as well as postgraduates. people for university from parts of africa, germany, commonwealth countries. we continue to provide scholarships for people from any part of the world, including those countries, but they may come from any part of the world. and one distinguishing characteristic which is not programd in the rhodes is we will give particular preference to people who can demonstrate they overcame adversity. overcame thecher adversity of coming from a very modest ground with no university tradition and her family at all. we are looking for people who can show already in their lives that they have managed to overcome.
nile: excellent. it is striking that margaret thatcher had to learn lessons in the space of about five months in order to enter into oxford university at the time, and as you mentioned, came from a very, very modest background. the daughter of a green grocer. she up it a must, i suppose, the can-do attitude -- she appeared ed, ied -- she epitomiz suppose, the can-do attitude of her generation. one question with regard to the scholarship -- margaret thatcher was famously denied an honorary doctorate when she was prime minister. , in spite ofin how that, the relationship with somerville college remained very warm for lady thatcher?
and she always kept a special place for somerville and her heart, despite her somewhat by the seniornt officials at oxford university? dr. prochaska: she was certainly shabbily treated by the university, and that was a mistake. somerville college was where she had her roots in the university, and some of you may pick up nile 's allusion to the fact that from royals came college. so, oxford graduates feel a particular loyalty to their own college. she felt it was an immense privilege to be there. it was a very special place. it had very, very high
traditions. at that time it was in all women's college. it gave her confidence in the support that she needed, and it and herintellectual emotional home. i think that was very important to her. furthermore, somerville did not dishonor her in anyway. quite the opposite. the college made her an honorary fellow as soon it she became a andnet minister in 1970 retained very close ties with her. the principle of somerville, my principalr, who was at the time margaret thatcher was prime minister was an extraordinary woman in her own right named stephanie park. she became the principle of somerville, she was the highest ranking woman insecurity --
although the college did not know that at the time. of was a huge admirer margaret thatcher. she was absolutely devastated when the university voted against giving the prime minister and honorary degree, and margaret thatcher wrote very consoling me and magnanimously to her along the lines of, don't worry, it's alright. i love somerville. it was such a privilege to be there. it will always have a place in my heart. have leaflets distributed amongst the audience quoting from some of the letters. the college was quite different from the university, although the university really did all out a really unforgivable insult. you very much. i would now like to bring in , my colleaguei
here at heritage, and attorney general under ronald reagan. you have the opportunity to meet with margaret thatcher on a number of occasions and you were instrumental as well in setting up the first white house meeting between president reagan and prime minister margaret thatcher in 1981. although the first meeting between reagan and thatcher to 1975,in england in several years before. planned agan had only few minutes to speak with margaret thatcher, at that time the leader of the opposition, but that short discussion was expanded into a 2-hour discussion, and immediately the two figures got on incredibly well. what were the qualities that margaret thatcher possess that so attracted reagan? and why did reagan admire
margaret thatcher's leadership so deeply? edwin: i think it started out as a matter of philosophy. reagan --en governor actually he had just left the governorship at the time. they had discussions and it views about the limitations of government were very similar. but i think it was her aggressive or fighting spirit, if you will, the fact that she was willing to stand up for her --iefs, and i think that in intrigued him. he had a similar position when he took over as governor for the state. for, in terms of his views
the federal government. also dealing with communism, there was a certain similarity of use there, no which were very important to him. of thethe combination philosophy and the ideas she expressed, but also her style was one that was very attractive to him. nile: and you were, of course, instrumental in that first white house meeting. could you talk a little bit about margaret thatcher's first meeting in 1981, how that transpired, what was the impact of that visit on the anglo-american relationship? the fact that she was the first head of government to visit ronald reagan in the white house was it self what impressive. the fact that they talked and shared a lot of views -- they talked, of course, in england, on a very informal basis rhythmic now, here you have the two leaders of two very
important countries. and the fact that she was the very first one received of the white house, focused on the special relationship between our countries in the very warm conversations, the fact that the two leaders got along well with each other, liked each other. it was an indication, a symbol of the two countries being very close at the time. that wasto a closeness implemented in many ways in the falklands with their dealings soviet union. i think it was a symbol of friendship between the two countries, but also an indication these leaders could work together very effectively. i was there at that first meeting of the industrialized countries, what we now call the big eight or the big seven, some
big something -- it was not called big at that time. it was called industrialized nations. itre were seven of them. at was ronald reagan and margaret thatcher were the only right of center government leaders there. everybody else was a socialist or a form of socialism in their countries. it was very interesting. also, most of the time when this group met, they would talk primarily about economics, and it was both president reagan and margaret thatcher who brought up the subject, we can talk about economics, but how do we deal with the major threats to our countries, which was soviet communism? that meeting at the white house was a precursor to the very important work they started with other countries as a team, which began in june or july. and that, of course, was
the first of many, many meetings between the two world leaders. margaret thatcher was instrumental in taking britain off its knees and restoring britain as a great economic and international power. what was the influence of margaret thatcher's policies on the reagan revolution? how influential were margaret thatcher's ideas in terms of shaping u.s. policies in the 1980's? mr. meese: i think they were very influential and i think it was very comforting to president reagan to see that she had been successful in england. when he took over, he faced to the same thing, the same problem in the united states. we were in deep trouble economically. it was the worst crisis since the great depression of the 1930's. we were in deep trouble as far as our military forces. they had deteriorated. we were, as many people said, we were no longer a credible
deterrent to our enemies or a reliable ally to our friends. ronald reagan was determined to change all of this. he campaigned on that. andit was reassuring to him she was doing the same things, a similar situation when she took over, so i think her example was very helpful to ronald reagan, and also was a lesson he could point to to the people of this country, look, another leader has done it. we can do it here. i would like to bring in john o'sullivan who spent many years as a senior speechwriter to margaret thatcher. workinge privilege of with him and london. on the theme of the special relationship, what drove margaret thatcher's tremendous admiration for the united states?
the relationship certainly rea ched its pinnacle during the reagan-thatcher era. but what was the thinking with regard to the relationship? sullivan: -- mr. o'sullivan: you must remember that margaret thatcher was a child of the war. any number of people will tell you after they heard the news of pearl harbor, oh, well, we have one. that was a huge background element in her thinking. and she had been taken to and spent six or eight weeks here, and she went all over the united states. she was tremendously impressed by the technical efficiency of
american industry and its advances in technology and by the general dynamism of american society. she felt very at home and that. -- she felt very home in that. she wanted britain to recover reputation.and has already as ed said, when she met ronald reagan, she found someone who shared all of her essential views. and if he were to become president, and he did, then she would be working with someone that, even when they disagree, they would be able to solve those disagreements fairly easily. but on most things they did not disagree. america, from the war, her experience there, and working with ronald reagan, was a place, a country and a people whom she
sympathized with and who could be great allies of her own country. john, as someone who knew margaret thatcher very well, how would you define thatcherism? and how this thatcherism differ from the brand of conservatism we currently have in britain today with david cameron and the conservative party? well, in then: first instance, there are many different definitions of thatcherism. which, the word, by the way, invented by the marxist -- well, the left in british politics. they do it, andrew campbell phrase, going to the a combination of a free economy and a strong state. strong meaning authority of state-- and authoritative . that's not a bad definition. the definition i would prefer was advanced by an
anglo-american scholar who described thatcherism as an encouragement of the vigorous virtues and society. you have the virtues of , of sobriety, of self-reliance, of determination, and she felt britain had been an exemplar of these virtues and the victorian age, but they have been lost under the kind of suffocating effects of socialism, and it was her duty to revive them again. a friend of mrs. thatcher. i think it is the correct one. i think when you look -- you have to look at all of the you can see there the application of those ideas -- the real idea is let's revive britain. would you say, john, that
thatcherism is still alive and well across britain? the pretenders to the leadership in the conservative party, david cameron is expected to step down in 2019 are 2020, there are a number of thatcherite contenders to replace mr. cameron. mr. o'sullivan: it is a complicated state, i would have to say. the conservative government has just won an election, but it was an election on a relatively small share of the vote, so it is not white is bold and confident in its approach -- it is not quite as bold and confident in its approach as it seems to be. we are living in a different world with her for problems to the one that mrs. thatcher faced in 1979. so it would be mistake to expect thatcherism to be exactly the same kind of thing. you are not dealing with over mighty unions now. you are not dealing with rapid inflation.
there is no longer a soviet union. there are different problems. if you're going to have a society that works economically in which is robust internationally, you're going to have to have vigorous virtues and i would say the resident conservative party is a little too much concerned with demonstrating that it is warmhearted and that it cares for everybody. i mean, it is desirable that these things be done. but not to the point where we wrong that there is a lot with britain today. it needs to be put right, and it can only be put right, and a sense, by the kind of vigorous virtues that she wanted. john, you work closely with lady thatcher on some of her biggest speeches and she was one of the greatest public speakers of our time. her would you identify as most important speech?
and could you talk a little bit about how she actually prepared for her speeches, the process involved in delivering a magnificent speech? well, i think: mrs. thatcher was a very effective public speaker in getting across her message. she was not an eloquent speaker in the 50 -- in the theatrical sense. she was effective. that was because she thought hard and long about the message she wanted to put across and she found a clear and simple way of saying it. there are one or two phrases that are out there which people remember. i think the best one socialistsblem with is they always run out of other peoples money. the reason that is a great phrase is it is a great truths she is strong attention to. most people, i think, would probably say her most important speech is the famous speech at bruges when she outlined her
attitude to the european union. a slightly less strong attitude than she later developed. that was a very effective speech. it was a compromise between her instincts and the question of the foreign office. she made it plain. she had not rolled back the frontiers of socialism in britain to see it he imposed again by brussels. i think most people would say that is her best speech. that is not my view. i prefer the speech she made after she left office and she made one or two very effective speeches. she was freer. every time she sent a speech up, every minister would come back saying, could you please remove this, could you please add that? she hated that, but being an effective prime minister, she had to do that kind of thing. i would say the best speech she made after she left office was hague, wherein the
she outlines her views on the european union and the reforms that are needed with greater freedom than she had previously. and it reads well today. nile: the 1992 speech? mr. o'sullivan: yes. nile: you referenced the light by margaret thatcher -- the lie by margaret thatcher about socialist governments running out of other people's money. that was recycled recently -- mr. o'sullivan: another one i can give you, she was trying to describe her attitude to wealth creation and distribution, and she said, the labor -- the believes and turning workers against owners. we believe in turning workers into owners. which of course she did. nile: that is a tremendous line.
i would like to focus on reagan and thatcher's relationship on the world stage. let's go back to mr. meese. reagan and thatcher were known for robust international leadership. with the rising threats today from isis and islamist terrorism across the globe, how do you think that reagan and thatcher would have responded to this threat in today's environment? all, i thinkrst of they probably would be united in their approach. theynk they would do as both did in dealing with the soviet communism. in many ways, there are differences, but there are similarities as well. i think they would have tried to bringing pattern of other countries together, and also of determining a strategy. you mentioned margaret
thatcher's most important speech. i think probably the most important speech ronald reagan gave he actually gave in england when in june of 1982 he delivered his speech at westminster in which he laid out a little print of how to deal with the soviet union. blueprint that he and margaret thatcher were able to talk with other leaders about, and that became a strategic exposition and this is something that has been lacking, of course, unfortunately, in dealing with isis and problems in the middle east. i think the first thing would have been to agree on a strategic approach of how you do this. secondly it would have been to coalition ofe like-minded countries, and that would include a number of countries in the middle east, a number of which are looking for some sort of leadership, and
third, to develop the resources to implement the strategy. i think right now one of the problems is we are suffering from a lakh of strategy, a lot of coalition, and a lakh of ofing resources -- a lack resources being readily available. london speech was the first mention, i think, iv evil empire, and it was a precursor to a larger speech -- mr. meese: yes, he used the words evil empire in 1983 in this country. he made it very clear the problem in the world was the soviet union, and what he said three countries would eclipse communism or of the the oppression other countries, that sort of thing, so, that was very clear. lifes drawing the battle
of the good guys and the bad guys, so to speak, and that was part of all of his speeches from that point on. it's interesting. he had this ability to be negotiating during the second half of his presidency and negotiating with gorbachev on one hand and at the same time maintaining his clear position of the wrongness of communism on the other. that in its elf was something margaret thatcher echoed -- that something that margaret thatcher echoed. it was a common goal the two countries had. another question for john o'sullivan. with regard to reagan and -- and determinism to thatcher's determination to confront the evil empire, what lessons should be learned today
by contemporary leaders -- president obama, david cameron, for example -- from the thatcher-reagan terms of standing up to the rights of vladimir putin today? , mr.l start with you meese, and then john. i think one of the things that both of these leaders never would have done is put themselves in a position that, say, obama is at the present time. forthright by being in their views, of being leaders by having plans, by having strategies, and by providing leadership for the other countries, they put themselves in a position where the other followed. when you have weakness -- leading from behind his never been a very good idea in my opinion, because it means in effect you are behind. fact thatk it is the
unfortunately in this country there has been a failure of leadership, which is allowed ideasto exercise his own on a world stage which is dominant. i do not think there is any time in whiche 1980's ronald reagan or margaret thatcher were not the dominant leaders. a leader.was but there was no question as far as the free world was concerned leaderst world had good who were self-confident without being arrogant. at the same time having a plan of where they thought the world should be going. like to ask the same question to john. mr. o'sullivan: i agree with what ed just said.
if you look at mrs. thatcher coming into power, and the same is true for ronald reagan, it is a good guidebook for what the next resident should do in this country. first task, you have to get your economy right, because if you do not have that right, you're not much of a threat to anybody else . they do not have to take you into account. secondly, you have allies. you have to work with them. you have to give them assistance where you can. a good example of this is one of the first things mrs. thatcher , 81 was ton 79-80 ensure the installation of u.s. missiles took place, eventually in 84. this meant going to leaders of other countries showing signs of weakness and encouraging them to take the missiles. occasion, helmut schmidt, the pro-american, very strong see her and came to
pointed out these social democrat and the party was proving resistant, did not want to take the missile. and she offered to take some of the missiles originally destined for germany. in all of these things, you have to be clear about where you are and what you are doing. go, they had a formidable opponent in her. that does not mean being aggressive. your anniversary -- your adversary cannot risk-taking action against you. helmut kohl in germany -- the to raise theeed spending to 3%. once that kind of action has taken effect, it does not have
to take effect right away. you have two or three or four years while the military buildup takes place, but the soviets knew it was they could no longer continue to make the advances they had made in the late 70's. so, in a sense, don't do anything rash. don't be unnecessarily bold, but prepare and let your enemies know they can get away with the murder they have been getting away with. mr. meese: i think one other aspect is both of these leaders, once they said they were going to do something, they went ahead and did it does write the opposition. i think when you mention the missiles and england, there was tremendous marches there. thousands of people marching against putting in the missiles. but mrs. thatcher's stood firm and that in itself was a possible exhibition of leadership. and as you point out, the soviet leaders realized they had formidable levers on the other side and ronald reagan was the same way. whether it was the air traffic controllers, when they struck
against the law, against a their own lives, he was firm holding the line against -- against he was firm holding the line against that. that was the quality of leadership in terms of doing what was necessary and what the job wires. -- the job requires. couldsullivan: i think we say these successful recovery of the falklands was a sign to the rest of the world that the british had to be taken seriously again. reagan's dealto with the air traffic controllers. mr. meese: i remember that very well. united states had a very hands-on policy in diplomatic circles, you might say. ronald reagan was absolutely positive we were going to support england. they were on the phone frequently. of course, we did provide some
assistance. it was fairly instrumental, i think, and getting the forces down to the falkland islands in time. very instrumental actually. [laughter] and john, an important issue facing the west today is the flow of refugees from syria, the middle east, north africa into western europe. i take a deep interest in this particular issue. what message and have we learned 'som margaret thatcher handling of immigration matters. mr. o'sullivan: it is an important issue in the united states as well and it's also an important issue for different
reasons in australia. dislike uncertainty. they dislike the feeling that things are out of control, that the government is not able to protect them against risks. is felt --tion people feel about immigration quite differently when their government is able to control it than when it seems out of control, as it does at the moment in europe. mrs. thatcher dealt with this issue in 1978 before she even came in. she was being interviewed on television and she said -- and this time, i should tell you, people were worried about the rise of the national front. unruly a neofascist or party of the right growing. i personally never took them seriously, but there was a lot of anxiety. at she went on television and she was asked a series of questions and to one of them she replied, i think
people are worried about the rise and immigration. they fear being swamped. this caused an outrage among some members of room party, but she stood by it, did not rich treat. and the support for the national front just went right down. when she got in, and at the time indeed, she was not proposing to make massive cuts in immigration or to expand it. she basically kept a moderate level of immigration throughout , and because everybody knew the government was in control of this, they ceased to be worried. it ceased to be a major issue. it has become a major issue for cicely because in recent weeks in europe because people feel their governments have lost they seem to be to some degree right. the refugees and people who are not refugees, economic migrants, are storming through europe and
moving into countries and having to be looked after by governments which in some cases invited the men, and other cases, they are simply there. they are simply running areas the migrants are going through. i would say the key lesson this is thatcher teaches us is that be able to must reassure their citizens that immigration is something they can control, are controlling, and can either rise or lower depending on the economic and social needs of their society. way, is ad, by the good example in australia. he has presided over quite a large increase in immigration, which the us trillions want for their economy. -- which the been australians want for their economy. there has been little less still it he or opposition to this because he also says we will decide here in australia under
what terms. once he said that, the steam when out of the issue has he meant it and the voters knew it. nile: we have the privilege of hosting john howard here a few years ago for the margaret thatcher freedom message. he delivered a very good message. also, john, another question to you. with regard to the future of was verynd issue that close to lady thatcher's hard for many, many years. could you talk about the evolution of margaret thatcher's views on europe? the -- i wouldss say rather mischievous suggestions by those who support britain staying inside the european union that margaret thatcher would have campaign to have stayed inside the eu?
impression ihe again from my own conversations with lady thatcher over her final years. could you address this and to what extent britain is holding a referendum by the end of 2017 on its membership in the european union? this issue is likely to dominate british politics for the next year. to do talk about margaret thatcher's views on europe and set the issue on the brexit issue and lady thatcher? mr. o'sullivan: excuse me. in suffering slightly from jet lag and a cold. about how talking someone who is no longer around would react to a question, we are doing something questionable. we do not know with certainty. we have to acknowledge that. different people who were close
to lady thatcher would give different answers to the question you asked me. i suspect -- i have not discussed it with her, -- with him, so i don't know -- charles power will give a slightly different answer to this then i will. my view is -- let me say one definite thing and one uncertain one. there is no doubt mrs. thatcher became increasingly skeptical about europe the longer she stayed in office, and then after she left office. in 1975, when she became the leader of the conservative party, she was not particularly well-informed on foreign policy. she set out to change that. accepted the orthodoxy of the tory party of the time, which was strong support to europe. when she was in office, she found europe a constant problem for her. partly in financial terms, partly in wider political ones, and she was increasingly annoyed
with it. it was an issue. it was her obvious resistance to further integration in europe that was one of the factors in her losing office. was not shared their by as many people in the conservative party as it was later and today perhaps. what would she do today? we can be absolutely certain of course. evidence is she moves further and further -- my conversations with her suggest that. you mentioned the book "statecraft," with which you worked with her, there she comes right up to conversation. things that have happened since then persuaded me that is the way she would be. however, as i say, it's illegitimate exercise. it cannot be certain, and others would take a different view.
my would be that she would want britain to recover its full independence. she also took the view that the avement of europe toward common defense policy was a threat to nato and an undesirable development insofar that she thought moving toward being a federal state would mean a breach in the long run with her,nited states, and for remaining friends and allies of leastericans was the second -- first principle of foreign policy. i like to bring him back into the discussion with regard to margaret thatcher's time at oxford. how important do you think